This Trib story suggests that with Republicans doing well in the high turnout 2020 election, and with the emergency measures that were implemented to expand voting access, the odds of getting a bill passed to make some forms of voting easier are as good as they’ve ever been.
Lawmakers and voting rights groups have been fighting over updates to Texas’ election systems for years, but issues heightened by the coronavirus pandemic have launched a new conversation over voter access.
This January, primarily Democratic lawmakers heading into the next legislative session are honing in on problems like backlogs in processing voter registrations, an unprecedented flood of mail-in ballots and applications that overwhelmed some elections offices, and a lack of viable alternatives to voting in person.
Outnumbered by GOP members in both chambers, Texas Democrats have seen their efforts to expand voter accessibility thwarted at virtually every turn for years.
But the pandemic-era challenges combined with strong Republican performance at the polls — which may have been boosted by record-breaking voter turnout across the state — has some lawmakers and political operatives believing there’s potential for conservatives to warm up to voting legislation that could improve accessibility.
A main reason is that voters of all political camps experienced some of these new ideas when they were introduced during the pandemic — things like drive-thru voting pilot programs, multiple ballot drop-off sites, turning in mail ballots during early voting and extended early voting — or realized that others, like online registration, would have made voting in the pandemic easier.
“My guess is [lawmakers are] going to hear from their Republican voters that they like to do this, and there will start to be Republicans championing these things, and they’re championing them from a majority point of view,” said Trey Grayson, a former Republican Kentucky secretary of state who was previously director of the Institute of Politics at Harvard University. “I would be shocked in five years if Texas didn’t have more of these reforms in place.”
Quinn Carollo Jr. is one of those Republican voters who said he applauded efforts in Texas to make it easier to vote. He was thrilled by Texas’ lengthy early voting period — which had been expanded from two weeks to three weeks because of the pandemic. He moved in recent years from Alabama, which doesn’t have early voting.
“There was plenty of opportunity to get by there and vote without dealing with a lot of lines on Election Day,” said Carollo, a 49-year-old transportation manager for a chemical company in Houston. “So I really enjoyed that. I’m all for it.”
Carollo said he’d like to see the longer voting period become a permanent part of Texas law, along with other reforms that might make voting easier and more accessible.
[…]
Bills already filed include legislation that would allow for online voter registration for those with driver’s licenses or state IDs, on-site voter registration at the polls during early voting and on election day, making election days state holidays, universal mail-in balloting, easing voter ID restrictions and allowing felony probationers and parolees to vote.
The idea of moving registration online is worth considering, given that some 41 other states have already implemented it, said Justin Till, chief of staff and general counsel for Republican state Rep. Greg Bonnen, R-Friendswood, who sponsored the 2019 bill that eliminated mobile polling sites and who has filed election fraud legislation to be considered this session.
“I don’t think it would be a problem if we were to transition. I know a lot of people are still hung up on the IT security part of it, which I get.” Till said. “So long as it’s a sound system, it will work fine and the other states that have implemented it thoughtfully have done so successfully.”
Till said Bonnen’s office would consider measures that could ease or expand access during early voting and eliminate long travel and wait times, such as extending the early voting period to three weeks and allowing counties to keep polling sites open beyond the state required minimum.
“If you can achieve that satisfaction point where everyone gets an opportunity to vote as quickly and as easily as they can, then you’re good,” Till said.
Voting rights advocates say that the experiences of millions of new voters in Texas this year could translate into election changes that are driven by the voters, not politics.
“I think a lot of people that had not been affected by some of the problems in our election systems were affected this time,” said Joaquin Gonzalez, staff attorney for the Texas Civil Rights Project. “So there are probably a lot more legislators who are hearing about it more from all walks of the aisle.”
A new “driving force” behind some legislation will be pressure to address or retain some voting initiatives that were born out of the pandemic, said Derek Ryan, a Republican consultant and voter data analyst in Austin.
These could include increased access to curbside voting, extended early voting periods and expanding countywide voting and online voter registration — the latter of which Ryan said was hit or miss with Republicans and “one of those issues that kind of splits the party.”
Among those that are anticipated but haven’t been filed yet are bills dealing with drive-thru voting, allowing 24-hour polling sites and making permanent a pandemic-era order by GOP Gov. Greg Abbott extending the early voting period to three weeks — all of them ideas that first appeared in some counties during the pandemic, several activists and lawmakers said.
”I think that after any election, we figure out that there are better ways to do things, and so there’s always some election legislation that kind of tries to clean up some of the process, but I think you’re probably going to see that even more so because of the pandemic,” Ryan said.
Maybe, but I’m going to see some hard evidence of this before I buy into the idea. The one place where maybe I can see something happening is with online voter registration, mostly because Republicans made a show of trying to register new voters this cycle, and running into the same problems everyone else who has ever tried to do this has run into, and that was even before the pandemic hit. The fact that there’s a staffer for a Republican legislator talking about it is of interest. I’m willing to believe something may happen here. As for everything else, my counterarguments are as follows:
1. The first bill out of the gate is a bill to restrict county election administrators from sending vote by mail applications to eligible voters, for no particular reason other than Paul Bettencourt’s sniffy disapproval of Chris Hollins doing it. It’s not an auspicious start, is what I’m saying.
2. While Greg Abbott did extend the early voting period and did allow for mail ballots to be dropped off during the early voting period (before then cracking down on where they could be dropped off), all of the prominent innovations like drive-through voting and 24-hour voting and multiple drop boxes were pioneered by local election administrators, most of whom were Democrats, with Chris Hollins in Harris County and Justin Rodriguez in Bexar County being among the leaders. I’d feel like this would be more likely if Abbott and the Lege were ratifying Republican ideas, rather than giving their stamp of approval to Democratic inventions. I admit that’s attributing a level of pettiness to Abbott and the Republicans in the Lege, but if we’re talking about the process being driven by feedback from the voters, I’ll remind you that the chair of the state GOP, several county GOP chairs, activists like Steven Hotze, and more were the plaintiffs in lawsuits that targeted not only the Hollins/Rodriguez-type innovations, but also Abbott orders like the third week of early voting. Plus, you know, the extreme animus that Donald Trump fed into Republican voters about mail ballots and other vote-expanding initiatives. What I’m saying is that while some Republican voters undoubtedly liked these new innovations and would approve of them becoming permanent, the loudest voices over there are dead set against them. We’d be idiots to underestimate that.
3. All of which is a longwinded way of saying, wake me up when Dan Patrick gets on board with any of this. Nothing is going to happen unless he approves of it.
4. Or to put it another way, even if these innovations help Republicans, even if everyone can now say that expanding turnout is just as good for Republicans as it is for Democrats, it’s still the case that making it harder to vote is in the Republican DNA; I’m sure someone will post that decades-old Paul Weyrich quote in the comments, to illustrate. I don’t believe that the experience of one election is going to change all these years of messaging.
5. To put that another way, Republicans might be all right with things that make it easier for them to vote, as long as they don’t make it easier for Democrats to vote. They’re absolutely fine with things that make it harder for Democrats to vote – and by “Democrats” I mostly mean Black voters, as far as they’re concerned – and if those things also make it harder for some of their people to vote, it’s an acceptable price to pay. Making it easier to vote, as a principle, is not who and what they are. I’ll be happy to be proven wrong, but until then I’ll be taking the under.
As a non-duopoly voter where available, I remain highly skeptical of good voting bills beyond what’s here being passed. We’ll see how the federal suit over HB 2504 goes.
SUPREME POLICYMAKING AND POLICY NIXING
Kuff is right to be skeptical. And don’t forget how the Texas Supreme Court has already undertaken to “legislate” in this area by other means. They are no doubt willing to do it again on as-needed basis (or as-requested by the AG under his newly-divined “ultra vires” plenary powers to police local officials that have no basis in the Texas Constitution.
In this policymaking forum it’s not just majority rule, not just supermajority rule, it’s about complete and absolute control (with 9 out of all 9 votes, which a comfortable margin of 4 above the simple 5:4 majority that’s now reason for concern about the future course of U.S. Supreme Court.
As a reminder, here is a synopsis of the dastardly deeds of the Judicial Branch of the Republican Party of Texas anno 2020:
• RESTRICTING VBM ELIGIBILITY BY JUDICIAL FIAT.
As written, the absentee voting provision of the Texas Election Code could have been interpreted as permitting voters to claim eligibility to vote by mail under pandemic conditions in the absence of immunity and cure. The Lege wouldn’t have had to come into session to legislature on the matter, as happened in other states. Instead, the judicial Republicans on the Texas Supreme Court took it upon themselves to make the situation worse, rather than better, by adding a judicially-crafted COVID exclusion to the Texas absentee voting statute, thereby denying Texas voters under 65 an unqualified right to request a ballot by mail to avoid the risk of infection associated with in-person voting at polling places. In re State, No. 20-0394, 602 S.W.3d 549 (Tex. May 27, 2020). The Chief Justice even saw fit to proclaim that average voters faced little risk while ignoring the amicus briefs of medical professionals, and the evidence in the record, relying instead on dictionaries lacking a definition for COVID-19. “For the population overall, contracting COVID-19 in general is highly improbable,” Chief Hecht ordered us to believe. Justice Guzman wrote separately to celebrate the group-think consensus. Wisely protecting their own selves from COVID exposure, the Supremes conducted the oral arguments in the case via Zoom, while denying Texans across the board the right to fill out their ballots at home to avoid getting infected. One of them actually had the virus at the time and could have spread it to her colleagues.
• INTERFERING WITH LOCAL EFFORTS TO PROMOTE VBM AND REDUCE CONGESTION AND CONAGION RISK AT IN-PERSON POLLING PLACES.
In another case involving mail-in voting in times pandemic, the judicial Republicans on the Texas Supreme Court were so eager to smack down Clerk Chris Hollins and thwart his efforts to encourage voting by mail to reduce congestion and infection risks at polling place that they couldn’t even wait for the AG to file his petition for review, and opened up a new case for him. See first docket entry in No. 20-0729 and resulting opinion: State v. Hollins, 2020 WL 5919729 (Tex. Oct. 7, 2020) (per curiam) (ruling, in interlocutory appeal of the denial of a temporary injunction sought by the Attorney General, that County Clerk was not allowed to mail unsolicited vote-by-mail applications to all registered voters in Harris County). BTW, the trial court never entered the injunction ordered by the SCOTX, but the damages was done, and the already-printed mailers consigned to be dumped.
• IMPEDING DROPOFF OF MARKED BALLOTS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO POSTAL RETURN.
In a third case, the judicial Republican sided with Abbott’s reduction of drop-off locations for mail ballots to one per county even though Abbott’s proffered rationale for this emergency order under the Texas Disaster Act was to enhance “ballot security”, a purpose that has nothing to do with the imperative to fight the declared disaster, and even though the rationale was also illogical because the drop-off delivery required presentation of the voter’s ID for a ballot that could alternatively be put in the mail with no such security measures. See Abbott v. Anti-Defamation League Austin, Sw., & Texoma Regions, No. 20-0846, 2020 WL 6295076 (Tex. Oct. 27, 2020)(per curiam). To justify their pro-Abbott ruling, the Supremes “borrowed” from a Fifth Circuit opinion in a case that rested on federal law, rather than state law, and was procedurally inapposite because it was an interim ruling by a motions panel that would not even be binding on the merits panel in the same case in the Fifth Circuit. See Texas League of United Latin American Citizens v. Hughs, ___ F.3d ___, No. 20-50867, 2020 WL 6023310 (5th Cir. Oct. 12, 2020) Granting Texas Secretary of State’s emergency motion for stay pending appeal).
• PAVING THE WAY FOR TRUMP TO NIX BALLOTS AFTER THE FACT.
And with regard to drive-thru voting in Harris County, the GOP Supremes refrained from issuing a ruling on whether the practice was permissible under the Election Code when afforded the opportunity, thus leaving open the possibility of a post-election challenge to the validity of a volume of ballots in the six-figure range cast in the largest Democratic-leaning county, in the event Trump would lose Texas by a narrow margin.